Frankie Rizzo is just a troll. He's really against gay marriage. That's clear. He babbles about polygamy, but that's just to flood the forum, because he doesn't have a rational argument against gay marriage. He is so dumb, that when I use the term "red herring", he says I'm talking about a fish!

Hardly, it is in fact carrying the context of gender, rather than illogically embracing every other aspect of marriage.The fact is, marriage has always been the reunion of genders into a genderless being.

Oh, lord. What crap.

Anyway, the only issue here is marriage as a legal contract. All US citizens should have equal protection under the law, regardless of genes. Seems to me you'd be in favor of that.

KiMare wrote:

In fact, it harkens back to the very roots of life; simple, genderless life forms.

Oh, puke.

Hallmark called, they want their sentimental nonsense back...

KiMare wrote:

Gay couples, on the other hand, are simply duplicate unions. Always only half of what a heterosexual couple equates to.Smile.

What about you? You have a set of female and male genes.Should you be allowed to marry? If so, why?

Frankie Rizzo is just a troll. He's really against gay marriage. That's clear. He babbles about polygamy, but that's just to flood the forum, because he doesn't have a rational argument against gay marriage. He is so dumb, that when I use the term "red herring", he says I'm talking about a fish!

Says the most angry and off topic little ad hominem troll on this thread.

Frankie Rizzo is just a troll. He's really against gay marriage. That's clear. He babbles about polygamy, but that's just to flood the forum, because he doesn't have a rational argument against gay marriage. He is so dumb, that when I use the term "red herring", he says I'm talking about a fish!

Polygamy is marriage. Worthy of the same respect and consideration as same sex marriage.

If that bothers you, you'll have to do better than calling it a red herring. I know you think it's very cute and witty, but it's not. It's stupid. It won't fly in court.

<quoted text>Religious and racial differences are small and unimportant while gender differences are great and mean the continuation of the human race. If Quest wants to stand for gender segregated marriage, that's her problem.Same sex marriage means more wasteful government spending on entitlements for a new class of same sex dependent beneficiaries and the higher taxes to pay for that and litigation.

You said that gay marriage will lead to forced marriages in prison. When do you think those will start in states that recognize gay marriage?

<quoted text>This is the type of line of thinking that happens when someone finally gives up. They KNOW there is no rational argument against same sex marriage, and admit it, but they just can't stop posting.It's sad, really. But kind of funny, too. They are proposing that the government interfere with marriage choices to an unprecedented and unsustainable level.They are demanding "diversity" inside of each marriage, so they must also require different religions and races to be present inside each marriage. It's not just gender that receives government protection against segregation and discrimination.Can you imagine the tax dollars and levels of governmental interference in personal lives required to implement their ideas?

We KNOW that you will argue the point til the cows come home, no matter how rational the argument. To you, there is no adequate explanation. Even though you know the behavior to be wrong, you will defend it, as does any drug addict, defending their drug of choice. It's a hallmark of your side. Denial. Your side spends an awfully large amount of time singing the virtues of playing in a garbage chute. Unhealthy, against natural design, you will accept no rational fact. You will deny the existence of religion, tradition, social opinion (even going so far as to claim that most of America accepts this unnatural union) claiming the existence of "fair and balanced" polls, none of which have ever come to my house, or to my E-mail account. That is what we KNOW. Like children pointing at the cookie jar, crying for the cookie that you know is in there, even though it is not appropriate to have said cookie. Your side thinks that marriage is an easy way to get free benefits from the government, even though those were created for legitimate families and not pseudo-marriages or sham marriages. We were not interfering with the government, you are. We left the government alone, your side lobbied it for change, and you label us as the interferers. Your side lies and cheats to have your way. Lobbyists. Fake polls. Infiltration into key positions for the sake of controlling national policy. That is what we KNOW. We KNOW that homosexuality is going to occur. We KNOW that calling it "marriage" is a tragedy and a travesty. We KNOW that any old coupling off of a pair is enough for your side to hold out greedy hands, and demand "recognition". And national acceptance, even though it has to be forced by legislation. This we KNOW. So, frankly, your post is a bunch of bullshit, and you merely wave a limp hand at the whole issue and call yourselves the persecuted, but winning, side.

<quoted text>What are you claiming I said that was a lie, ugly? Do you even know who said what? The Urban Dictionary is a good source to use for finding the meanings of acronyms used on the internet.

Of course I know who said what. The lie that you made was about him not knowing what that childish retort of "I know you are, but what am I" meant. To you, it must have served as high cryptology, but to the rest of us, it was laughably juvenile. I was reading it with glee. He was answering your question, of what you were, with the appropriate answer, which was "Incoherent, as usual". Where is the problem ? That you got caught accusing him of not knowing what it meant, and having it thrown, easily, back at you. You called him a liar, and I disproved that false claim and produced the actual exchange, and proved you to be the liar. Because he never said that he didn't know what it meant. Simple. Dumb-ass.Stupid Chongo, there'll be no bananas........for you.

<quoted text>We KNOW that you will argue the point til the cows come home, no matter how rational the argument. To you, there is no adequate explanation. Even though you know the behavior to be wrong, you will defend it, as does any drug addict, defending their drug of choice. It's a hallmark of your side. Denial. Your side spends an awfully large amount of time singing the virtues of playing in a garbage chute. Unhealthy, against natural design, you will accept no rational fact.

Most people into anal sex are straight, ugly. And it's really not an issue when it comes to marriage rights. Straight couples have it.

Randy -Rock- Hudson wrote:

<You will deny the existence of religion, tradition, social opinion (even going so far as to claim that most of America accepts this unnatural union) claiming the existence of "fair and balanced" polls, none of which have ever come to my house, or to my E-mail account. That is what we KNOW. Like children pointing at the cookie jar, crying for the cookie that you know is in there, even though it is not appropriate to have said cookie. Your side thinks that marriage is an easy way to get free benefits from the government, even though those were created for legitimate families and not pseudo-marriages or sham marriages. We were not interfering with the government, you are. We left the government alone, your side lobbied it for change, and you label us as the interferers. Your side lies and cheats to have your way. Lobbyists. Fake polls. Infiltration into key positions for the sake of controlling national policy. That is what we KNOW. We KNOW that homosexuality is going to occur. We KNOW that calling it "marriage" is a tragedy and a travesty. We KNOW that any old coupling off of a pair is enough for your side to hold out greedy hands, and demand "recognition". And national acceptance, even though it has to be forced by legislation. This we KNOW.So, frankly, your post is a bunch of bullshit, and you merely wave a limp hand at the whole issue and call yourselves the persecuted, but winning, side.

<quoted text>Another lie. He didn't think it, he knew it. It indicates he couldn't understand what you said. What you say is almost always incoherent. "Ranting", "Babble". Another lie, from the dumb-ass.

Yeah, he couldn't understand what I said, because he didn't know what "IKYABWAI" means.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.